Packers Huddle

NCF wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2021 13:56

go pak go wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2021 13:51

Looks like Snacks will be a go today.

Yeah when the Packers showed a 98 jersey this morning....it seemed pretty obvious.

I was hopeful, but hesitant on Snacks. He got 12 snaps on defense against the Bears. It was clear from those, he makes an impact. His first play he was several yards in the backfield. So I am now more excited for what he will bring. Hope he gets more snaps.

Good nose tackles often end up with zero stats, because they eat the blockers and plug gaps and the LBs get the stats.

I'd have to see film to know how he did.

paco wrote: ↑

04 Jan 2021 09:16

I was hopeful, but hesitant on Snacks. He got 12 snaps on defense against the Bears. It was clear from those, he makes an impact. His first play he was several yards in the backfield. So I am now more excited for what he will bring. Hope he gets more snaps.

I thought our run defense really tightened up in 2nd half of the 2nd quarter and beyond.

I want to watch again. Thought Lowry and Lancaster were subpar yesterday struggled early.

I mean we gave up 3.5 yards per rush and 4.8 yards per play overall. Those are really good numbers.

We forced 15 third downs. That's a sign of a good day by the run D--that's 15 times they didn't get to a first down on 1st or 2nd, ya know?

Obviously, this is a Snacks thread and 12 snaps is a small part of that; but as far as the run D overall, I think they did very well!

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

04 Jan 2021 09:49

I mean we gave up 3.5 yards per rush and 4.8 yards per play overall. Those are really good numbers.

We forced 15 third downs. That's a sign of a good day by the run D--that's 15 times they didn't get to a first down on 1st or 2nd, ya know?

Obviously, this is a Snacks thread and 12 snaps is a small part of that; but as far as the run D overall, I think they did very well!

Wow. I didn't know we held em to 3.5 rushing. That is a lot better than I would have guessed.

We really did lock up after that 1st quarter.

go pak go wrote: ↑

04 Jan 2021 10:10

Wow. I didn't know we held em to 3.5 rushing. That is a lot better than I would have guessed.

We really did lock up after that 1st quarter.

Montgomery had 69 yards on 22 carries (3.1) and a long run of 8.

Cordarelle Patterson had 4 for 18 yards (4.5) and Mitch had 4 scrambles for 22 yards (long of 13)

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

04 Jan 2021 10:30

go pak go wrote: ↑

04 Jan 2021 10:10

Wow. I didn't know we held em to 3.5 rushing. That is a lot better than I would have guessed.

We really did lock up after that 1st quarter.

Montgomery had 69 yards on 22 carries (3.1) and a long run of 8.

Cordarelle Patterson had 4 for 18 yards (4.5) and Mitch had 4 scrambles for 22 yards (long of 13)

Montgomery is an average back. Not as good as JWill.

Montgomery had over 500 yards in the 5 games before week 17. He's pretty good.

Let's hope we see more of Snacks in the Divisional Round.

Pugger wrote: ↑

04 Jan 2021 18:33

Let's hope we see more of Snacks in the Divisional Round.

Not really. If we don't have to play Snacks, it means we've built a big lead and have knocked the opponent out of running the football.

But early in the game, sure.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

04 Jan 2021 18:15

Montgomery had over 500 yards in the 5 games before week 17. He's pretty good.

Against pretty much the worst Ds in the league.

Cdragon wrote: ↑

04 Jan 2021 19:35

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

04 Jan 2021 18:15

Montgomery had over 500 yards in the 5 games before week 17. He's pretty good.

Against pretty much the worst Ds in the league.

I mean did the Packers do much better vs these "worst" Ds in the league than the Bears did in December?

Their only loss was to DET in December outside of us and I wouldn't put that on the Bears' offense.

The saga of us trying to get this guy and getting turned down several times made me not want to like him. At least, not want to get excited, because getting my hopes up seemed like setting myself up for disappointment.

But man... in the limited snaps he was out there, his impact was really noticeable. Guys like Lowry and Lancaster may be able to get the job done, but guys like Snacks can really tilt the field (not to mention, make life easier for the LBs).

I definitely want to see him out there early to start the game, help our D shut down and force some punts, then let the O pull away.


It also solidifies my wish to add another quality DL, whether it's a big body like Snacks or a long athlete in the mold of Armstead or Buckner. I think that could really make this D come together nicely.

Labrev wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2021 13:50

It also solidifies my wish to add another quality DL, whether it's a big body like Snacks or a long athlete in the mold of Armstead or Buckner. I think that could really make this D come together nicely.

Yeah, I've said all year that we were a run-clogging DT away from a Super Bowl roster, I just didn't think Snacks would be the guy, based on all the flirtation and disappointment. And once it became clear that Dareus wasn't playing this year (essentially opted out but without a contract) and Snacks went to the Seahawks, I thought that window had closed.

Glad it hadn't.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2021 13:55

Labrev wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2021 13:50

It also solidifies my wish to add another quality DL, whether it's a big body like Snacks or a long athlete in the mold of Armstead or Buckner. I think that could really make this D come together nicely.

Yeah, I've said all year that we were a run-clogging DT away from a Super Bowl roster, I just didn't think Snacks would be the guy, based on all the flirtation and disappointment. And once it became clear that Dareus wasn't playing this year (essentially opted out but without a contract) and Snacks went to the Seahawks, I thought that window had closed.

Glad it hadn't.

may I interject here the thing is in the fronts we use the most (some sort of 40 hybrid, I think) Lowery, Lancaster, Keke, even Gary get tossed around against the run, when your using Clark on one side, and the others on the other side of center, they just can't handle the double teams, Harrison is a guy that can, it works for us because Pettine given a choice will always give up a few run yrds for better pass coverage, so he sacrifices a interior lineman to do so, we played a lot of base 5 front against the Titans, but with Henry, and a run dominate team, that seemed a no brainer, imo ya just can't do that against a more balanced offense, ya have to scheme first to stop the pass, and hope the run doesn't sustain drives and milk top, I've always believed in coverage first in this era (30 years or so)

man I love this team, just because I bitch about this or that, I've wanted what we are seeing now for so long, I love all the motion and mis direction, ro schemes, who doesn't, this offense is so much more fun to watch compared to Mack vertical iso routes, without the right players no scheme will work well, just look what happened to this offence when we lost Ervin, my point is, yes, this offense can really get hot, it was lights out at times, then Irvin went down, and we miss him, I give Guty credit for trying to replace him with Austin, but we just found out why he was available, ouch,, my point is as you would guess by now is we could really use a slot type WR/RB, oh wait, we got one, maybe we'll see some of Jones in the slot and Dillon at RB in the playoffs, I'am sure Dillons all for it.